Previous
Introduction
I analysed the think tank sector survey responses and reflected on the very meaning of a ‘think tank’ within the Nepali context. A widely accepted view suggests that an actual think tank should be distinctly dedicated to policy work, producing evidence-supported research findings as a public good to inform both the public and policymakers in their decision-making processes.
A distinct perspective defines a think tank as a reservoir of ideas, expert groups that conduct research and provide analytical viewpoints on political, economic, social, or policy issues, often advising specific strategies.
Download the On Think Tanks State of the Sector Report 2025
However, the way diverse think tanks fulfil this role may vary significantly across countries, continents, and different contexts, influenced by cultural, political, and institutional complexities and local dynamics. Understanding think tanks within their specific national and international contexts would therefore have an impact on outcomes.
In Nepal’s context, there is ambiguity about what is a think tank, and this affects both institutional development and public perception in general. There is no clear governance structure that articulates the definition regulating such new institutions. Interestingly, a recent survey revealed that more than half of Nepali organisations identifying themselves as think tanks were registered as NGOs or foundations, underscoring the absence of a formal legal or institutional framework for registration of think tanks in the country.
The evolution of think tanks in Nepal
The think tank landscape in Nepal includes government-funded institutions, university-affiliated research centres, and independent organisations. However, the emergence of independent think tanks, as entities focused solely on policy research and advice, has occurred only in recent decades.
The review of Nepal’s think tank landscape reveals that Nepal has government-led think tanks, university research centres, and independent think tanks. History can be traced to both government-affiliated institutions and university-based research centres, with the emergence of independent think tanks in a distinct way occurring only in recent years. The country’s think tank ecosystem has evolved through a layered and evolutionary process.
The National Planning Commission (NPC) has been the apex policy advisory body for the Government of Nepal’s economic development since 1956. In addition, under the umbrella of Tribhuvan University, the Centre for Economic Development and Administration (CEDA) and the Centre for Nepal and Asian Studies (CNAS), began playing a critical role, since 1960s, in national development process through academic research and policy dialogue.
The evolution of independent think tanks in Nepal is not straightforward, as organisations were not dedicated to being think tanks in their structures, format, and functions. Many organisations currently identified as think tanks in Nepal started as non-government organisations and are involved in advocacy, outreach, and engagement. They were generally categorised as civil society organisations, non-governmental organisations (NGOs). This initiative has evolved in tandem with Nepal’s various socio-political phases, and with each phase, the concept has become increasingly defined.
The post-1990 People’s Movement, which restored multiparty democracy in Nepal, opened the door for research, writing, advocacy, and freedom of expression. The restoration of democracy and the emergence of an open political environment led to the creation of numerous public and private think tanks, which aimed to address policy gaps within a democratic context.
From the early 2000s, there was a surge in rights-based NGOs, as well as research and policy-focused organisations that began to thrive. This decade also saw the rise of policy research and consultancy organisations operating beyond the conventional NGO model. Additionally, this growth was further fueled by advocacy-based organisations focused on the rights of marginalised communities, as well as research and knowledge production.
Since 2018, Nepal’s think tank landscape has entered a new phase. That year, the Government of Nepal conceptualised a dedicated policy think tank, the Policy Research Institute (PRI), to institutionalise research-based policymaking. In parallel, a group of diaspora scholars and practitioners unveiled the Nepal Policy Institute (NPI) and its interim strategic plan during the 1st Global Nonresident Nepali Association (NRNA) Knowledge Convention in Kathmandu, marking the formal entry of a focused, independent think tank into the national policy sphere. Since then, government ministries, including the Office of the Prime Minister, have begun establishing policy labs to support evidence-informed decision-making.
During the graduation ceremony of the Nepal Policy Leadership Program (NPLP) in April 2025, a collaborative effort between NPI, Kathmandu University, the Nepal Prime Minister’s Office and the Nepal Policy Institute, the key leaders of these institutions emphasised the growing need for closer collaboration between academia, government, and think tanks to address complex policy challenges. This marks a significant development in the increasing relevance and institutional recognition of think tanks in Nepal.
Opportunities and challenges for think tanks in Nepal
Nepal’s visibility in global policy networks and academia reflects progress toward a more evidence-supported, pluralistic think tank ecosystem. However, challenges remain, most important among them being the lack of transparent governance and a legal framework for think tanks.
In this endeavour, Nepal Policy Institute (NPI) partnered with On Think Tanks to conduct the State of the Sector 2025 survey. Based on the study, the following main findings are revealed:
- Institutional Identity: Most think tanks in Nepal are registered as non-profits or foundations. In contrast, others are for-profit consultants, revealing a lack of standardised institutional comprehension in working norms as think tanks.
- Core funding and sustainability: Eleven out of fourteen organisations reported that their funding is almost entirely project-based. The remaining few had a combination of project-based and limited core funding. None had sustainable core funding, and nearly all struggled to cover indirect costs.
- Long-term financing: More than one-third reported funding cycles of less than six months; some others had funding for one to two years, highlighting a lack of predictable long-term financial steadiness.
- Shrinking funding Trends: ten out of fourteen organisations noted that their funding had either remained at the same level/or declined in recent years, pointing to a shrinking funding landscape.
Despite the above challenges, several think tanks hoped that future funding opportunities and recognition of institutional identity might improve in the future.
The way forward
The road ahead for Nepal’s think tank sector includes both promise and peril. The lack of a legal framework for official recognition of institutional identity undermines credibility and hinders think tanks from operating smoothly and sustainably. Over-reliance on foreign donations could shift the focus away from the priorities of the local people.
Nepal Policy Institute (NPI) is leading this transformative shift by exploring the skills and experience of the Nepali diaspora globally. Through ongoing policy research, leadership development programs, and capacity-building initiatives, such as the Young Researchers Award, NPI is cultivating a talent pool, building a knowledge platform, and establishing an expertise bridge to address Nepal’s policy needs.
Looking forward, establishing sustainable funding mechanisms, enhancing institutional capacity, and fostering cross-sector collaboration will enable Nepali think tanks to focus on independent, issue-driven policy discourse and contribute more effectively to the country’s long-term development.
Recommendations:
- Recognise Think Tanks as a Distinct Sector with Research Integrity Provisions.
- Simply codify access to policy research funding through transparent mechanisms.
- Encourage cross-sectoral collaborative partnerships between government, academia, and civil society to institutionalise evidence-informed policymaking.
- Decentralise policy engagement to provincial and other local-level governance.
- Engage diaspora policy-focused institutions for fostering scalable policy innovation and sustainable collaboration.
